lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2021]   [Mar]   [18]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: [PATCH 3/3] static_call: Fix static_call_update() sanity check
On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 11:13:08AM -0500, Josh Poimboeuf wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 12:31:59PM +0100, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > if (!kernel_text_address((unsigned long)site_addr)) {
> > - WARN_ONCE(1, "can't patch static call site at %pS",
> > + /*
> > + * This skips patching __exit, which is part of

This skips patching built-in __exit, ...
?

> > + * init_section_contains() but is not part of
> > + * kernel_text_address().
> > + *
> > + * Skipping __exit is fine since it will never

+ built-in, again

> > + * be executed.
> > + */
> > + WARN_ONCE(!static_call_is_init(site),
> > + "can't patch static call site at %pS",
> > site_addr);
> > continue;
> > }
>
> It might be good to clarify the situation for __exit in modules in the
> comment and/or changelog, as they both seem to be implicitly talking
> only about __exit in vmlinux.

Correct.

> For CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD, the code ends up in the normal text area, so
> static_call_is_init() is false and kernel_text_address() is true.
>
> For !CONFIG_MODULE_UNLOAD, the code gets discarded during module load,
> so static_call_is_init() and kernel_text_address() are both false. I
> guess that will trigger a warning?

Oh gawd, more variants.

Afaict MODULE_UNLOAD, by virtue of that #ifdef in
rewrite_section_headers() won't even load the .exit sections. Afaict
that will break: alterative, jump_label and static_call patching all in
one go.


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2021-03-18 18:01    [W:0.076 / U:0.452 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site